Public art: A scornful mayor

Sunday

Jul 31, 2011 at 12:01 AMJul 31, 2011 at 1:00 AM

Henry J. Waters III

Mayor Bob McDavid says he is “not a fan” of the artwork in the new parking garage at Fifth and Walnut streets. The colored glass décor extending up the stairway is full of foreign references and was created by Stuart Keeler, a Chicago artist who has done similar work in other public spaces around the country.

After saying we “make a mistake when we don’t use local artists,” McDavid proclaimed, “We will never see this artist again.”

Keeler was paid $140,000 under the city’s Percent for Art program, an admirable but treacherous public initiative — admirable because our city atmosphere will inevitably be enhanced by the presence of substantial art in public places, treacherous because public underwriting of art is sure to cause controversy.

In front of the new City Hall, a large keyhole arose. Judging from the relative quietude attending its christening, this stylized construction seems to have met with general approval. Abandoning my usual caution, however, I had weighed in during the selection process, suggesting an old-fashioned representational statue of Daniel Boone pointing west with his dog at his heels. We even had a world-class local sculptor in residence. No artist anywhere is better qualified to cast pioneers than our own Sabra Tull-Meyer, whose Lewis and Clark figures adorn the state Capitol grounds in Jefferson City.

My proposal would have met McDavid’s criteria: a local artist and, presumably, less controversial subject matter than subtle colors of glass displaying time stamps and quotes from other locations lying along Columbia’s 38th parallel.

But, to my amazement, no overwhelming public support arose for Daniel Boone standing alongside the Daniel Boone Building, and the choice was left to the city selection committee.

My point is not to whine about being rejected but to gain sympathy for our fellow citizens who use their best instincts and judgment to fulfill the Percent for Art mandate. I have a hunch that if the mayor were given the sole authority to choose the next art piece, some would be disdainful of his cloddish tastes.

McDavid has legitimate reason to want broken parts of “Sky Algorithm” repaired. He probably elevates his nose slightly at the very name of the thing. His admonition about using out-of-town artists no doubt reflects a general disdain for “far-out” stuff that might or might not be assuaged by only considering locals.

The mayor and the rest of us will have another shot soon as the new Short Street garage is built. The art process involves multiple bids by aspiring artists and a public display of finalist works by the committee.

Did something go wrong with the process when Keeler’s stained glass was chosen, or do we merely see the inevitable churn of emotions when public art goes up? The mayor’s reaction will seem overly petulant to some. His prohibition against ever seeing Keeler in town again is silly, and his angst over Fifth and Walnut has nothing to do with what happens at Short and Walnut unless he wants to change the entire Percent for Art process, which I reckon he does not.

HJW III

If more than 10 percent of the population likes a painting, it should be banned, for it must be bad.